|
|
Hyperflake
from Wirral (United Kingdom) on 2018-08-20 08:56 [#02558927]
Points: 31006 Status: Lurker
|
|
LAZY_TITLE
|
|
welt
on 2018-08-20 10:16 [#02558930]
Points: 2036 Status: Lurker
|
|
Why would human beings have 2 feet, 2 arms, 2 ovaries/testicles, 2 eyes, 2 nostrils, 2 ears and in general be so symmetrical? It's quite astonishing. Why are they symmetrical like the letter "H" and not asymmetrical like, for instance, the letter "P"?
|
|
Tony Danza
from NAFO Suicide Hotline on 2018-08-20 13:07 [#02558935]
Points: 3638 Status: Lurker | Followup to welt: #02558930
|
|
Do you think this is a metaphysical question or one amenable to empirical investigation?
|
|
welt
on 2018-08-20 13:22 [#02558936]
Points: 2036 Status: Lurker | Followup to Tony Danza: #02558935
|
|
I'd like ( a ) a metaphysical explanation for the symmetry of human beings, ( b ) an empirical explanation for it ... and ( c ) a selection of mystical experiences from individuals in different civilisations/traditions which reveal the need for human symmetry.
If the best of all these explanations are compatible with each other, then I'd consider it an overall good explanation.
Anything less - very very thin and doubtful
|
|
Tony Danza
from NAFO Suicide Hotline on 2018-08-20 13:57 [#02558937]
Points: 3638 Status: Lurker | Followup to welt: #02558936
|
|
It seems to me you'd need a metaphysical explanation for symmetry, point final, which would be part of a larger explanation for order in general, then with that presupposed, an empirical explanation for the specific example of human symmetry.
As for the mystical experiences, I know a janitor who has memorized the lyrics to the complete works of Rush and occasionally smokes "cheeba". I can ask him.
|
|
Hyperflake
from Wirral (United Kingdom) on 2018-08-20 14:38 [#02558940]
Points: 31006 Status: Lurker | Followup to welt: #02558930
|
|
redundancy? stability? depth of perception with two eyes stuff like that, but yeah why 2 and not three or 4, perhaps its to do with what is most energy efficient, if you have 3 of everything you have a higher chance of injury and fatigue I guess
|
|
welt
on 2018-08-20 19:20 [#02558961]
Points: 2036 Status: Lurker | Followup to Tony Danza: #02558937
|
|
Right now I'm not even sure if there could be a metaphysical explanation of symmetry. I can't even think of a candidate for an explanation. What could an answer look like? "Symmetry exists because ..." Because what? "Symmetry exists because Symmetry is good" ?? "Symmetry exists because Being as such is symmetrical and thus symmetry trickles down to mathematical objects and animals" ?? "Symmetry exists because it pays off to conceptualize objects as symmetrical" ??Well, I guess these are answers of some sort. But what the fuck.
|
|
mohamed
from the turtle business on 2018-08-20 20:05 [#02558965]
Points: 31145 Status: Regular | Show recordbag
|
|
Monoid's ipod
|
|
Hyperflake
from Wirral (United Kingdom) on 2018-08-20 23:41 [#02558984]
Points: 31006 Status: Lurker
|
|
one bollock big than the other is symmetry breaking
|
|
Tony Danza
from NAFO Suicide Hotline on 2018-08-21 15:27 [#02559016]
Points: 3638 Status: Lurker | Followup to Hyperflake: #02558984
|
|
Hyperflake raises an important point - what if symmetry is only apparent? It's there at first glance, then you look closer and deeper and find one tit or ball bigger, one heart, spleen and stomach offset to the left rather than mirrored, etc.
People perceive symmetrical faces as more attractive, all else being equal. Gross asymmetry is a flag for damage or congenital defect. Perhaps there's something to "symmetry exists because it pays off to conceptualize objects as symmetrical".
|
|
welt
on 2018-08-21 16:52 [#02559023]
Points: 2036 Status: Lurker | Followup to Tony Danza: #02559016
|
|
But the concept of "something paying off" already presupposes the concept of symmetry. Perhaps ..:
What does it mean that something pays off? If cost and gain are equal then something does not pay off. So if you express the cost vs gain relationship in charts/diagrams it means the following: If the cost-column and the gain-column are equal and symmetrical then something doesn't pay off. If the gain-column is higher/larger than the cost-column and there is thus an asymmetrical relationship something does indeed pay off.
So explaining the fact that we recognise some objects as (more or less) symmetrical via the concept of something paying off seems to be circular reasoning. (Because in order to understand what 'paying off' means you need some sort of understanding of 'symmetry'.) Is it a vicious circle? I'm not 100% sure.
|
|
Tony Danza
from NAFO Suicide Hotline on 2018-08-21 23:52 [#02559117]
Points: 3638 Status: Lurker | Followup to welt: #02559023
|
|
But lots of things "pay off", not just approximate symmetry and the ability to recognize it - the smell of food, the smell of fertile pussy, the capacity to distinguish figure from ground, the fear of predators, and so.
|
|
EpicMegatrax
from Greatest Hits on 2018-08-22 02:22 [#02559124]
Points: 25264 Status: Regular
|
|
i prefer this creature
|
|
Messageboard index
|